IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION FIRST APPEAL NO: 81 OF 2019 Between: 1. Bayya Venkateswarlu, S/o.Venkateswarlu (C.1), aged about 55 years, R/o.Stone Hose pet. Near Kanyakaparameswari Temple, Nellore Town and District. 2. Bayya Sudarsanarao, S/o.Venkataswamy (C.2), aged about 57 years, R/o.Vijaya Dairy Upstairs, Subedarpeta, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District. 3. Bayya Srinivasulu, S/o.Venkataswamy (C.3), aged about 52 years, R/o.Vijaya Dairy Upstairs, Subedarpeta, Nellore , SPSR Nellore District. 4. Rechaputi Ramanadham, S/o.China Venkata Subbaiah (C.4), aged about 60 years, R/o.Opp Vivekananda Public School, AC Nagar, Nellore Town and District. 5. Kanchi Sudarsana Rao @ Surendrarao (C.9), S/o.Ramakrishnaiah, aged about 69 years, R/o.Sannidhi Apartments, Indiranagar, Manapakkam, Kanchipuram, Tamilanadu. 6. Kadiveti Venkata Ramaiah (C.10 died) (Died per LR.8) (LR of this claimant Is shown as appellant No.10) 7. Malireddy Jayarami Reddy, S/o.Ramachandrareddy (C.14) aged about 88 years, R/o.Gundavolu Village, Rapur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. ...Appellants/Claimant Nos.1 to 4, 9,10 & 14. 8. Kanchi Nirmala alias Nimmi (LR of C.10), W/o.Late Subrahmanyam Naidu @ Subrahmanyam, aged about 66 years, R/o.Thurpuveedhi, Jonnawada Village, Butchireddipalem Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. (Grant leave to the petitioner No.8 is brought on record as LR of deceased claimant No.10 vide Court Order, dated 27.03.2025 in lA No.3/2019 in LAAS No.81/2019) ...Appellant/Proposed LR of Claimant No.10. AND 1. The Special Deputy Collector (LA), Telugu Ganga Project, Rapur at Nellore, Mulapet, Neelagirisangam, Nellore. ...Respondent/R.O 2. Pengani Pullamma (C.5 died) 3. Konda Gangi Reddy, S/o.Penchala Reddy (C.6) 4. Pothala Subbarathnamma, W/o.Ramachandraiah (C.7) 5. Pothala Rosamma, W/o.Venkatapathi (C.8) 6. Perumalla Penchalaiah, S/o.Yellaiah (C.ll) 7. Kotturu Rami Reddy, S/o.Somireddy (C.12) 8. Kaluvoy Anki Reddy (C.13 died) 9. Dumpa Penchala Narasa Reddy, S/o.Veera Reddy (C.15) 10.Kaluvoy Ankamma. ...Respondents/Claimants (Respondent Nos.2 to 10 are not necessary parties) Appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the Judgment and Decree, dated 21-02-2002 passed in LAOP.No.69 of 1993 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gudur, SPSR Nellore District. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Order and Decree of the Trial Court, and material papers in the petition and upon hearing arguments of Sri Chetiuru Sreenivas, Advocate for Appellants and the Government Pleader for Appeals/Respondent No.1 THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE: 1. That the Appeal be and is hereby allowed in part; That the compensation for each pomegranate tree be and is hereby enhanced to Rs.2,500/-: 2. That the appellants be and are hereby pay the Court fee on the enhanced compensation amount; 3. That the appellants be and are hereby not entitled to interest during the period of delay in preferring the appeal after disposal of the L.A.O.P by the Reference Court; 4. That the appellants be and are hereby entitled to compensation for the total number of trees as identified by the Land Acquisition Officer in the Award, and not as the total number of trees as claimed by the appellants in the Reference Court; and 5. 6. That there be no order as to costs in this Appeal. Sd/- E. KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRARS //TRUE COPY// SECtrON OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gudur, SPSR Nellore District. 2. Three CD Copies HIGH COURT BSV DATED:24/04/2025 DECREE LAAS.No.81 of 2019 ALLOWING THE APPEAL IN PART WITHOUT COSTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 81 OF 2019 Appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the Judgment and Decree, dated 21-02-2002 passed in LAOP.No.69 of 1993 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gudur, SPSR Nellore District. Between: 1. Bayya Venkateswarlu, S/o.Venkateswarlu (C.1), aged about 55 years, R/o.Stone Hose pet, Near Kanyakaparameswari Temple, Nellore Town and District. 2. Bayya Sudarsanarao, S/o.Venkataswamy (C.2), aged about 57 years, R/o.Vijaya Dairy Upstairs, Subedarpeta, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District. 3. Bayya Srinivasulu, S/o.Venkataswamy (C.3), aged about 52 years, R/o.Vijaya Dairy Upstairs, Subedarpeta, Nellore , SPSR Nellore District. 4. Rechaputi Ramanadham, S/o.China Venkata Subbaiah (C.4), aged about 60 years, R/o.Opp Vivekananda Public School, AC Nagar, Nellore Town and District. .• r 5. Kanchi Sudarsana Rao @ Surendrarao {C.9), S/o.Ramakrishnaiah, aged about 69 years, R/o.Sannidhi Apartments, Indiranagar, Manapakkam, Kanchipuram, Tamilanadu. 6. Kadiveti Venkata Ramaiah {C.10 died) (Died per LR.8) (LR of this claimant is shown as appellant No.10) 7. Malireddy Jayarami Reddy, S/o.Ramachandrareddy (C.14) aged about 88 years, R/o.Gundavolu Village, Rapur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. ...Appellants/Claimant Nos.1 to 4, 9,10 & 14. 8. Kanchi Nirmala alias Nimmi (LR of C.10), W/o.Late Subrahmanyam Naidu @ Subrahmanyam, aged about 66 years, R/o.Thurpuveedhi, Jonnawada Village, Butchireddipalem Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. (Grant leave to the petitioner No.8 is brought on record as LR of deceased claimant No.iO vide Court Order, dated 27.03.2025 in lA No.3/2019 in LAAS No.81/2019) ...Appellant/Proposed LR of Claimant No.lO. AND 1. The Special Deputy Collector (LA), Telugu Ganga Project, Rapur at Nellore, Mulapet, Neelagirisangam, Nellore. ... Respondent/R.O 2. Pengani Pullamma (C.5 died) 3. Konda Gangi Reddy, S/o.Penchala Reddy (C.6) 4. Pothala Subbarathnamma, W/o.Ramachandraiah (C.7) 5. Pothala Rosamma, W/o.Venkatapathi (C.8) 6. Perumalla Penchalaiah, S/O.Yellaiah (C.11) 7. Kotturu Rami Reddy, S/o.Somireddy (C.12) 8. KaluvoyAnki Reddy (C.13 died) 9. Dumpa Penchala Narasa Reddy, S/o.Veera Reddy (C.15) Kaluvoy Ankamma. 10. ...Respondents/Claimants (Respondent Nos.2 to 10 are not necessary parties) Counsel for Appellants :Sri Chetiuru Sreenivas Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP for Appeals The Court made the following: / / APHCOI 0870172015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH l, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY present the honourable SRI JUSTICE the honourable SRI JUSTICE LAND ACQUISITION APPF^[ PRADESH 0^' [3526] day OF APRIL FIVE ninala jayasurya TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO SUIT NO:81 of 201Q Between: Bayya Venkateswarlu S/o. Venkateswarlu Aged about 55 years, R/o. Stone Hose pet Near Kanyakaparameswari Temple ^ Nellore Town & District ^ I and 7 others -Appellants AND The Special Deputy Collector (LA) Mulaoet^Np^? Project. Rapurat Nellore, Mulapet, Neelagirisangam, Nellore Counsel for the Appellants: Counsel for the Respondents: GP for Appeals The Court made the following Judgment: Against the and 9 others -Respondents Mr. Chetiuru Sreenivas common judgment and decree dated 21.02.2002 in L.A.O.P No.69 and 70 of 1993, 63 of 2022. The appellants 1993 filed the present some of the claimants therein filed herein who L.A.A.S No.61 and are the claimants in L.A.O.P No.69 of appeal with a delay, which was condoned by a separate order. Be that as it may. 2- In L.A.A.S No.61 and 63 of 2022, the compensation for pomegranate - per tree. Keeping in view the said aspect, to as the claim is restricted to Rs.2,500/- same compensation. trees was fixed @ Rs.2,500/ maintain parity and this Court is inclined to award the \ However, the learned Government Pleader has disputed about the number of trees. Therefore, it is made clear that the appellants are entitled to compensation for the total number of tress as identified by the Land Acquisition Officer in the award and not as the total number of trees as claimed by the appellants in the Reference Court. 3. 4. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The compensation for each pomegranate tree is enhanced to Rs.2,500/-. The appellants shall pay the Court fee on the enhanced compensation amount. The appellants are not entitled to interest during the period of delay in preferring the appeal after disposal of the L.A.O.P by the Reference Court. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. 5. Sd/- E. KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gudur, SPSR Nellore District. 2. One CC to Sri Chetluru Sreenivas, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to GP for Appeals, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 4. Three CD Copies + Along with Photo copy of the certified copy of Common Judgment dated 05.10.2023 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in LAAS Nos.61 and63of2022. BSV Cnr HIGH COURT BSV DATED:24/04/2025 JUDGMENT AND DECREE LAAS.No.81 of 2019 ALLOWING THE APPEAL IN PART WITHOUT COSTS > THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEeKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO L.A.A.S. Nos.61 of 2022 AND 63 of 2022 i COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy) These appeals are filed aggrieved by the orders of the Reference Court, whereby the claim of the appellants for enhancement of compensation for the trees available in the lands that were acquired was dismissed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and Sri M.K.Raj Kumar, learned Government Pleader for Appeals for the respondents. Since the common issue is involved in these two appeals relating to the enhancement of compensation to the trees available in the lands that were acquired, these two appeals are heard* together i and they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 3. 4. The lands of the appellants were acquired for the purpose of foreshore submersion of Kadaleru reservoir under Telugu Ganga Project by issuing various notifications. Compensation was accordingly paid for the lands that were acquired. Now there is no dispute relating to the compensation that was paid for the lands that were acquired. The controversy involved in these appeals only pertains to the compensation that was fixed for various trees that are CMR, JATRR, LAAS Nos.61 & 63 of 2022 available in the said lands that were acquired. The Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the value of the trees as shown in the awards. Not satisfied with the value fixed for the trees by the Land Acquisition Officer, the appellants sought referenoe under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013. Accordingly, the matter was referred to the Civil Court (hereinafter called ‘reference Court’, for short). ’ The reference Court declined the request of the appellants to enhance the compensation of the trees on the sole ground that the material on record shows that there are only plants available in the lands and they did not reach to the fruit bearing stage and, as such, they are not entitled for enhancement of compensation. 5. The legal position whether the claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation even in respect of the trees which are not fruit bearing is not res Integra and the same has been well 6. settled. This Court in L.A.A.S.No.52 of 2019, granted compensation of Rs.2,500/- for each pomegranate tree. Even though it was found in the said case that the trees are only 12 months old and that they are not fruit bearing trees at that time, still the Court has enhanced the compensation. The said compensation was granted on the basis of the ratio laid down in Ashok Kumar v. State of Haryana^ by the Apex Court. Based on the said judgment, again, this Court recently in L.A.A.S.No.2 of 2023' also, enhanced the compensation for the (2016) 4 see 544 w CMR, J.&TRR, J LAAS Nos.61 & 63 of 2022 0 trees even though they are found to be not fruit bearing trees at the time of the acquisition. Therefore, despite the fact that there plants available in the lands that were acquired and they fruit bearing trees at that time, it is now well settled that the claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation. As regards the compensation for various trees that available in the acquired lands? this Court in L.A.A.S.No.417 of 2008, granted compensation in respect of various trees as detailed hereunder: are only are not t 7. are Mango, Acid Lime, Guava, (Sapodilla) Coconut, Jack-fruit & Sapota Rs.3,000/- per tree Tamarind Rs.6,000/- per tree Cheeni (Sweet Orange) Rs.4,000/- per tree Soap-nut Rs.5,000/- per tree Rs.2,500/- per tree Rs.2,500/- per tree Rs.2,000/- per tree Pomegranate Cashew nut trees Drumstick & Neredu (Black- plum) Dates & palmyra trees Rs.300/- per tree Rs.400/- per tree Remaining trees 8. Following the said judgment. Co-ordinate Division Bench this Court again in L.A.A.S.No.28 of 2019 and batch, by way of the common judgment rendered on 05.11.2019, awarded compensation for the trees at the same rate. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid of CMR, J.& TRR, J LAAS Nos.61 & 63 of 2022 4 % judgments, the appellants herein arg entitled for enhancement of compensation for the trees jg acquired in these appeals also at the same rate. the lands that were 9. allowed, enhancing the compensation for the trees available in the acquired lands, as detailed supra, with all statutory benefits compensation. However, the appellants are not entitled to statutory benefits during the period of delay in filing the appeals, appellants have to pay the Court fee at the enhanced rate, if not already paid. There shall be no order as to costs. Resultantly, the two appeals are the enhanced on The As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in these appeals, shall stand closed. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 05.10.2023 siva